Mark Levin: ‘Unbridled Immigration, Legal and Illegal, Is Taking the Country Down’. * * *
*
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times

Sunday, February 21, 2010

THIS IS DATED. THE LA RAZA DEMS HAVE CONTINUED TO FIGHT FOR MORE ILLEGALS, OPEN BORDERS, AND THE EXPANSION OF THE MEXICAN WELFARE STATE DESPITE THE STAGGERING UNEMPLOYMENT AND THE STAGGERING COSTS OF THIS OCCUPATION. LOS ANGELES ALONE PAYS OUT $50 MILLION PER MONTH TO ILLEGALS ON WELFARE!

Dobbs: Democratic hacks embrace lunacy of amnesty

NEW YORK (CNN) -- This new Congress was supposed to be different. Instead, it is being led by a gaggle of partisan hacks pandering to the same special interests and corporate masters as the previous Republican-led Congress. So-called comprehensive immigration reform legislation is about to take a privileged position on the Democratic agenda in the Senate. It will likely succeed, just as it did in that august chamber last year, when 38 Democratic senators sided with the president to pass the bill and tried to slam amnesty down the throats of the House of Representatives and their 300 million constituents. And the now Democratic-controlled House is likely to embrace rather than combat the lunacy of amnesty. The same characters are already shoveling the same nonsense that overwhelmed reason in the Democratic Party and the Bush administration last year. Front and center in their march to madness: The bill's sponsor, Senator Ted Kennedy, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Immigration Task Force Rep. Luis Gutierrez and House Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren. Also meeting with Sen. Kennedy this week is the Archbishop of Los Angeles, Cardinal Roger Mahoney. The good senator is rounding up all of the usual suspects to lead the charge in advance of his introduction of the amnesty legislation, expected within the next week or two. Cardinal Mahoney has said point blank that his followers should disregard laws on immigration as a matter of Catholic conscience. This is the same Cardinal who fought all the way to the Supreme Court to keep secret all documents related to pedophilia among priests. But the Cardinal and other Catholic leaders are quick to embrace the laws of bankruptcy protection in order to not compensate victims of sexual abuse by members of the clergy and keep them out of the U.S. judicial system. So far, five such dioceses have done just that. The same corporate lobbyists and dominant special interests that drove last year's legislation are even more energetic this year, and they're enthusiastically helping Senator Kennedy write the new legislation. The biggest business lobby in the country, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and its associated organization, the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, are actually writing parts of the bill, presumably so that none of our other senators would be unfairly burdened by actually doing their own work. Or perhaps in Senator Kennedy's estimation, they simply don't have the intellectual wherewithal to tackle the required mental heavy-lifting. Senator Kennedy and his staff claim they're not being secretive about the details of the so-called comprehensive immigration reform, but they're just not willing to tell the public or other senators how the bill is being constructed. Notable Republicans are growing increasingly frustrated by their exclusion from the process, taking some umbrage at the immigrant advocacy groups replacing them in that process. The Chamber of Commerce itself is feverish with expectation, confident their reform bill will certainly keep wages depressed. The Chamber claims there's a labor shortage in many of these industries: construction, housing services, leisure and hospitality. And that's where the cleverly named Essential Worker Immigration Coalition comes in. Founded, staffed and supported by the Chamber itself, the coalition is made up of the same industries claiming they desperately need more workers. But there is a non-trivial disconnect here: In each of those industries, a labor shortage leads to higher wages. Unfortunately for the EWIC and the Chamber, and really for American workers, real wages in those industries have been declining, suggesting a very real surplus, not a deficit, of unskilled labor. Yet this President and this Congress continues to push the adoption of a guest-worker program. It's no wonder they have matching approval ratings in the low 30s. Real wages in the overall construction sector have fallen nearly 2 percent since the start of the decade and nearly 4 percent since the recent wage peak in 2003. Construction workers in 2006 were making the same per-hour salary as they did in 1965 (measured in 1982 dollars). Landscaping workers have also seen real wages fall by nearly 4 percent since 2001. For the leisure and hospitality sector, workers are making the same per-hour salary as they did in 1972. I've said for years that we cannot reform immigration if we cannot control it, and we cannot control it unless we secure our borders and ports. Once again it is clear that corporate America, special interests and the out-of-touch elites of the Senate have little regard for truth, working Americans, the common good and the national interest. The Democratic Party is now putting working Americans and their families in the exact same position as the Republicans: last. This Democratic-led Congress and this Republican President seem intent on pushing middle-class Americans, and truth, into the shadows. We asked for bipartisanship. But I don't think we can stand any more of it.

*Lou Dobbs Tonight Thursday, April 9, 2009

Plus, outrage after President Obama prepares to push ahead with his plan for so-called comprehensive immigration reform. Pres. Obama is fulfilling a campaign promise to give legal status to millions of illegal aliens as he panders to the pro-amnesty, open borders lobby. Tonight we will have complete coverage. *Lou Dobbs Tonight Monday, February 16, 2009 Construction of the 670 miles of border fence mandated by the Bush administration is almost complete. The Border Patrol says the new fencing, more agents and new technology have reduced illegal alien apprehensions. But fence opponents are trying to stop the last few miles from being finished. We will have a full report, tonight.

Plus, even open border advocates agree that the most effective way of fighting illegal immigration is to crack down on the employment of illegal aliens. Yet, those same groups are opposed to E-Verify, which has an initial accuracy rate of 99.6% making it one the most accurate programs ever. E-Verify was stripped from the stimulus bill but who stripped it out and who is opposed to verifying employment status is still not clear.

*“The president's straddling can work for the time being. But unless he wants to end up in the sawdust, acrobat Obama will eventually have to hop on one horse and lead the way. That would have to be the horse named "Enforcement First." CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR

According to the HERITAGE FOUNDATION.org, the Mexican invasion will cost us 3.7 trillion ABOVE what the illegals put into the economy.

“WE’RE GOING TO TAKE OVER ALL THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS IN CALIFORNIA. IN FIVE YEARS THE HISPANICS ARE GOING TO BE THE MAJORITY POPULATION OF THIS STATE.... ANYONE THAT DOESN’T LIKE IT SHOULD LEAVE IT!”, Mario Obledo,

TAKEN FROM TRANSCRIPTS DATED 1995. MANY OF THESE LA RAZA POLITICIANS HAVE WON HIGHER OFFICES WITH THE VOTES OF ILLEGALS.

“WE WILL TAKE CONTROL OF OUR COUNTRY (U.S.) BY VOTE IF POSSIBLE AND VIOLENCE IF NECESSARY!”

Agendas of MEChA, La Raza, MALDEF, and Southwest Voter Registration Projects These are transcripts of live, recorded statements by elected U.S. politicians, college professors, and pro-illegal alien activists whose objective is to take control of our country "by vote if possible and violence if necessary!"

"These are the critical years for us as a Latino community. We're in a state of transition. And that transformation is called 'the browning of America'. Latinos are now becoming the majority. Because I know that time and history is on the side of the Chicano/Latino community. It is changing in the future and in the present the balance of power of this nation. It's a game - it's a game of power - who controls it. You (to MEChA students) are like the generals that command armies. We're in a state of war. This Proposition 187 is a declaration of war against the Latino/Chicano community of this country. They know the demographics. They know that history and time is on our side. As one community, as one people, as one nation within a nation as the community that we are, the Chicano/Latino community of this nation. What this means is a transfer of power. It means control."

“THE NEW LEADERSHIP OF THE AMERICAS... IS MEXICAN!”“REMEMBER: (PROPOSITION) 187 IS THE LAST GASP OF WHITE AMERICA IN CALIFORNIA!”

GLORIA MOLINA, RACIST MEXICAN SUPREMACIST IS NOW ON THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. A HUGE PORTION OF THE COUNTY’S REVENUES ARE PAID OUT TO ILLEGALS IN WELFARE. $50 MILLION DOLLARS MONTHLY

. LOS ANGELES COUNTY CALCULATES THAT THE TAX-FREE MEXICAN UNDERGROUND ECONOMY IS ABOUT $2 BILLION PER YEAR AND GROWING FAST.

“I’M GONNA GO OUT THERE AN VOTE BECAUSE I WANT TO PAY THEM BACK!” Los Angeles County Supervisor GLORIA MOLINA

10. Gloria Molina, one of the five in Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference, 6/1996 "This community is no longer going to stand for it. Because tonight we are organizing across this country in a single mission, in a plan. We are going to organize like we've never organized before. We are going to go into our neighborhoods. We are going to register voters. We are going to talk to all of those young people that need to become registered voters and go out to vote and we're are politicizing every single one of those new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country. And what we are saying is by November we will have one million additional Latino voters in this country, and we're gonna march, and our vote is going to be important. But I gotta tell you, there's a lot of people that are saying, 'I'm gonna go out there and vote because I want to pay them back!' And this November we are going to remember those that stood with us and we are also going to remember those that have stood against us on the issues of immigration, on the issues of education, on the issues of health care, on the issues of the minimum wage."

“LONG LIVE OUR RACE!”is the call of LA RAZA “THE RACE:

11. Vicky Castro, former member of Los Angeles Board of Education at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference, 6/1996 "Que viva la raza, que viva la raza (long live our race)! I'm here to welcome all the new voters of 18 years old that we're registering now in our schools. Welcome, you're going to make a difference for Los Angeles, for San Antonio, for New York, and I thank Southwest for taking that challenge. And to the Mechistas (MEChA students) across this nation, you're going to make that difference for us, too. But when we register one more million voters I will not be the only Latina on the Board of Education of Los Angeles. And let me tell you here, no one will dismantle bilingual education in the United States of America. No one will deny an education to any child, especially Latino children. As you know, in Los Angeles we make up 70% of this school district. Of 600,000 -- 400,000 are Latinos, and our parents are not heard and they're going to be heard because in Los Angeles, San Antonio and Texas we have just classified 53,000 new citizens in one year that are going to be felt in November!"

“I STARTED THIS VERY QUIETLY BECAUSE THERE ARE THOSE THAT IF THEY KNEW THAT WE WERE CREATING A WHOLE NEW CADRE OF BRAND NEW CITIZENS IT WOULD HAVE TREMENDOUS POLITICAL IMPACT.”

TAKEN FROM TRANSCRIPTS DATED 1995. MANY OF THESE LA RAZA POLITICIANS HAVE WON HIGHER OFFICES WITH THE VOTES OF ILLEGALS.

“WE WILL TAKE CONTROL OF OUR COUNTRY (U.S.) BY VOTE IF POSSIBLE AND VIOLENCE IF NECESSARY!”

Agendas of MEChA, La Raza, MALDEF, and Southwest Voter Registration Projects These are transcripts of live, recorded statements by elected U.S. politicians, college professors, and pro-illegal alien activists whose objective is to take control of our country "by vote if possible and violence if necessary!" 1. Armando Navarro, Prof. Ethnic Studies, UC Riverside at Latino Summit Response to Prop 187, UC Riverside, 1/1995 "These are the critical years for us as a Latino community. We're in a state of transition. And that transformation is called 'the browning of America'. Latinos are now becoming the majority. Because I know that time and history is on the side of the Chicano/Latino community. It is changing in the future and in the present the balance of power of this nation. It's a game - it's a game of power - who controls it. You (to MEChA students) are like the generals that command armies. We're in a state of war. This Proposition 187 is a declaration of war against the Latino/Chicano community of this country. They know the demographics. They know that history and time is on our side. As one community, as one people, as one nation within a nation as the community that we are, the Chicano/Latino community of this nation. What this means is a transfer of power. It means control."

“THE NEW LEADERSHIP OF THE AMERICAS... IS MEXICAN!”“REMEMBER: (PROPOSITION) 187 IS THE LAST GASP OF WHITE AMERICA IN CALIFORNIA!”

“THE LATINOS ARE COMING... THE LATINOS ARE COMING!!! AND THEY’RE GOING TO VOTE!”

9. Antonio Villaraigosa, Chair of MEChA (student wing of Aztlan movement) at UCLA, former CA assemblymember, former CA Assembly speaker, currently Los Angeles City Mayor, and formerly Councilman at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference in Los Angeles, 6/1997 "Part of today's reality has been propositions like 187 (to deny public benefits to illegal aliens, 1994), propositions like 209 (to abolish affirmative action, 1996), the welfare reform bill, which targeted legal immigrants and targeted us as a community. That's been the midnight. We know that the sunny side of midnight has been the election of a Latino speaker - was the election of Loretta Sanchez, against an arch-conservative, reactionary hate-mongering politician like Congressman Dornan! Today in California in the legislature, we're engaged in a great debate, where not only were we talking about denying education to the children of undocumented workers, but now we're talking about whether or not we should provide prenatal care to undocumented mothers. It's not enough to elect Latino leadership. If they're supporting legislation that denies the undocumented driver's licenses, they don't belong in office, friends. They don't belong here. If they can't stand up and say, 'You know what? I'm not ever going to support a policy that denies prenatal care to the children of undocumented mothers', they don't belong here."

Here’s one teacher’s report on the illegals in our schools.TEACHER’S POSTING ON CRAIGSLIST:Subject: Cheap Labor This should make everyone think, be you Democrat, Republican or Independent From a California school teacher. "As you listen to the news about the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things that you should be aware of: I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a large southern California high school which is designated a Title 1 school, meaning that its students average lower socioeconomic and income levels. Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell Gardens, Huntington Park, etc., where these students are protesting, are also Title 1 schools. Title 1 schools are on the free breakfast and free lunch program. When I say free breakfast, I'm not talking a glass of milk and roll -- but a full breakfast and cereal bar with fruits and juices that would make a Marriott proud. The waste of this food is monumental, with trays and trays of it being dumped in the trash uneaten. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK) I estimate that well over 50% of these students are obese or at least moderately overweight. About 75% or more DO have cell phones. The school also provides day care centers for the unwed teenage pregnant girls (some as young as 13) so they can attend class without the inconvenience of having to arrange for babysitters or having family watch their kids. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK) I was ordered to spend $700,000 on my department or risk losing funding for the upcoming year even though there was little need for anything; my budget was already substantial. I ended up buying new computers for the computer learning center, half of which, one month later, have been carved with graffiti by the appreciative students who obviously feel humbled and grateful to have a free education in America. (OUR TAX DOLLARS A T WORK) I have had to intervene several times for young and substitute teachers whose classes consist of many illegal immigrant students here in the country less then 3 months who raised so much hell with the female teachers, calling them "Putas" whores and throwing things that the teachers were in tears. Free medical, free education, free food, day care etc., etc., etc. Is it any wonder they feel entitled to not only be in this country but to demand rights, privileges and entitlements? To those who want to point out how much these illegal immigrants contribute to our society because they LIKE their gardener and housekeeper and they like to pay less for tomatoes: spend some time in the real world of illegal immigration and see the TRUE costs.

Becerra has voted for any measure that would benefit illegals, or sabotage the Mexican invasion and expansion of the Mexican welfare state.

BECERRA TO HISPANDERING OBAMA:

Here’s Becerra’s quote from the same article in Congressional Quarterly:

But the wound was exacerbated earlier this week when Rep. Becerra, one of Obama’s most prominent Hispanic supporters, told Politico that he advised the Obama campaign that he could wrap up Hispanic backing by saying “Just give him to me for a week, and I will deliver the Latino vote.” (NO ILLEGAL FRONT HAS FAILED TO SEE OBAMA HISPANDER TO THEM TO DATE)

THE STAGGERING BURDEN OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION TO TAXPAYERS… What’s the cost to our culture? HEARD ENGLISH TODAY?

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR

"We are now just beginning to see a glimpse of the staggering burden on American taxpayers the Reid-Kennedy immigration legislation contains,"

*

"The amnesty alone will be the largest expansion of the welfare system in the last 25 years," says Robert Rector, a senior analyst at the Heritage Foundation, and a witness at a House Judiciary Committee field hearing in San Diego Aug. 2. "Welfare costs will begin to hit their peak around 2021, because there are delays in citizenship. The very narrow time horizon [the CBO is] using is misleading," he adds. "If even a small fraction of those who come into the country stay and get on Medicaid, you're looking at costs of $20 billion or $30 billion per year."

*ARTICLE:

THE STAGGERING BURDEN OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION TO TAXPAYERS (dated figures)

Immigration bill sticker shock $127 BILLION

A government study puts the cost of the Senate's version of reform at $127 billion over 10 years.

The price tag for comprehensive immigration reform was not a key issue when the Senate passed its bill last May. But it is now. One reason: It took the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) - the gold standard for determining what a bill will cost - until last week to estimate that federal spending for this vast and complex bill would hit $127 billion over the next 10 years. At the same time, federal revenues would drop by about $79 billion, according to the CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation. If lawmakers fix a tax glitch, that loss would be cut in half, they add. In field hearings across the nation this month, House GOP leaders are zeroing in on the costs of the Senate bill. It's a bid to define the issue heading into fall elections and muster support for the House bill, which focuses on border security. They say that the more people know about the Senate version, including a path to citizenship for some 11 million people now in the country illegally, the less they will be inclined to support it.

“WE ARE NOW JUST BEGINNING TO SEE A GLIMPSE OF THE STAGGERING BURDEN ON AMERICAN TAXPAYERS” OF THE MEXICAN INVASION.......

"We are now just beginning to see a glimpse of the staggering burden on American taxpayers the Reid-Kennedy immigration legislation contains," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, who convened a field hearing at the State House in Concord, N.H., Thursday on the costs of the Senate bill. But business groups and others backing the Senate bill say that the cost to the US economy of not resolving the status of illegal immigrants and expanding guest-worker programs is higher still. "In my opinion, the fairer question is: How will illegal immigrants impact the costs of healthcare, local education, and social services without passage of comprehensive immigration reform?" said John Young, co-chairman of the Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform, at Thursday's hearing. "Had we solved this problem in a truly comprehensive way in 1986 ... we would not have the daily news reporting outright shortages of farm labor threatening the very existence of agricultural industries coast to coast," he adds. Experts are poring over the new CBO data - and coming up with radically different assessments of the social costs of reform, ranging from tens of billions of dollars higher to a net wash. On the issue of border security - a feature in both bills - there is little disagreement. The CBO estimates that the cost of hardening US borders in the Senate bill is $78.3 billion over 10 years, or about 62 percent of the bill's total cost. The fireworks involve new entitlement spending in the Senate version. The CBO sets the price tag for services for some 16 million new citizens and guest workers at $48.4 billion through fiscal year 2016. That includes $24.5 billion for earned income and child tax credits, $11.7 billion for Medicaid, $5.2 billion for Social Security, $3.7 billion for Medicare, and $2.4 billion for food stamps. But it's easier to estimate the cost of a mile of fence than to assess the prospects for millions of workers, once they can work legally and claim benefits.

*“THE AMNESTY ALONE WILL BE THE LARGEST EXPANSION OF THE WELFARE SYSTEM IN THE LAST 25 YEARS” Heritage Foundation

THE REASON HE WANTED LA RAZA BILL RICHARDSON AS CABINET SECRETARY, DESPITE RICHARDSON'S LONG HISTORY OF CORRUPTION, IS BECAUSE RICHARDSON IS A MEXICAN, AND A RACIST ONE A THAT (DO A SEARCH FOR LA RAZA MEMBERS).

THE REASON OBAMA ELEVATED JUDGE SOTOMAYER IS NOT JUST BECAUSE SHE'S A "WISE LATINA BITCH" BUT BECAUSE SHE'S HISPANIC AND HAD DEMONSTRATED A LONG HISTORY OF SERVICING THE CORPORATE INTERESTS FROM HER BENCH. SOTOMEYER NOW REFERS ILLEGALS AS "UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS" GOSH!

THE REASON OBAMA WANTED NAPOLITANO WAS BECAUSE SHE WAS A LA RAZA RACIST, AND WORKED HARD FOR TO EXPAND THE MEXICAN INVASION. HER STATE OF ARIZONA HAS ONE OF THE LARGEST MEXICAN OCCUPATIONS IN THE COUNTRY. NEXT TO MEXICO CITY, PHOENIX HAS THE LARGEST MEXICAN KIDNAPPINGS ON EARTH.

OBVIOUSLY AS OBAMA CONTINUES TO SABOTAGE OUR BORDER'S DEFENSE BY NOT FUNDING THE WALL,SABOTAGES E-VERIFY, AND REPEATEDLY HAS TAKEN HUNDREDS OF BORDER GUARDS OFF OUR NAROCO BORDERS WHILE MEXICAN TERRORIST MURDER, WE KNOW HE WILL ALWAYS SELL US OUT. JUST AS HE DID HIS BANKSTER DONORS FOR THE FIRST YEAR IN HIS ONLY TERM.

OBAMA'S HOMELAND SECURITY UNDER NAPOLITANO IS NOW THE "HOMELAND SECURITY = PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP = NEW ILLEGAL VOTERS"

“Unless I see something inherently helpful to our community, I’m going to sit back and see what happens,” Napolitano said.

Napolitano and some of her Hispanic colleagues are informally boycotting Obama campaign events aimed at reaching out to Clinton supporters because the candidate himself has not asked for their help. (NAPOLITANO’S COMMENT ON “OUR” COMMUNITY, IS NOT THAT OF THE AMERICA PEOPLE. IT IS MEXICAN ILLEGALS WHOM SHE REPRESENTS IN CONGRESS)

WILL SEN. SCOTT BROWN WORK FOR THE PEOPLE, OR SELL OUT TO THE ILLEGALS LIKE OBAMA?

BARBARA BOXER IS ENDORSED BY LA RAZA. SHE WANTS OPEN BORDERS, NO E-VERIFY, NO I.C.E. ENFORCEMENT, NO ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS PROHIBITING THE EMPLOYMENT OF ILLEGALS. 47% OF THE WORK FORCE IN LOS ANGELES ARE ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS.

TIME TO END THE MEXICAN OCCUPATION, WELFARE & PRISON STATE? THEN STOP VOTING FOR THE UTTERLY WORTHLESS BARBARA BOXER!

Mass. immigration reforms in peril after Brown winBy Russell Contreras, Associated Press Writer | January 23, 2010BOSTON --For months, immigrant advocacy groups like the Chelsea Collaborative and Berkshire Immigrant Center have been gearing up to push lawmakers on state and federal immigration reforms.They've held statewide forums, marched in Washington, D.C., and organized rallies with hopes of seeing the major immigration overhaul promised by Gov. Deval Patrick and President Barack Obama.But after the historic election victory of Republican Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate, those illusions may be evaporating. Political observers say Brown, who ran on a platform opposing some of those reforms, has emboldened conservative voters, and they will likely table reforms in the near future."Much of the angry and frustration of voters, particularly those on the right, are clearly aligned with forces that oppose immigration reform," said Paul Watanabe, a political science professor at University of Massachusetts-Boston. "They are vocal opponents of anything other than enforcement."Watanabe said it's now doubtful that Patrick and state lawmakers will spend political capital pushing any controversial proposals in an election year shortly after Brown's victory.Patrick has said he is planning to seek re-election this fall, but is struggling with sagging poll numbers.During his campaign, Brown said he opposed granting driver's licenses and in-state tuition rates to illegal immigrants -- ideas Patrick vowed to support in November after receiving recommendations from an advisory panel. As a state senator, Brown also introduced legislation that would have required proof of citizenship or right to work in the U.S. for wage enforcement cases."His record is concerning," said Eva Millona, executive director of the Massachusetts Immigrants & Refugee Advocacy Coalition, a group that represents 130 immigrant groups.But Brown's positions excited conservative voters and won him endorsements and praise from national groups like Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, who hailed him for opposing "amnesty."It's a dramatic shift from positions taken by his predecessor, the late Sen. Edward Kennedy. The Democratic senator sponsored a 1965 immigration law that changed the nation's demographic makeup by scrapping an immigration quota system that favored Western Europeans, and he remained for decades a "go-to" legislator for immigrant advocates.After Brown's victory over Democrat Martha Coakley, the Federation of American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, sent out a statement arguing that Brown's win showed even Massachusetts voters oppose some of Kennedy's ideas on immigration and that it would be "suicide" for any politician to support certain reforms."If support for amnesty and benefits for illegal aliens won't fly in Massachusetts, it won't fly anywhere," said FAIR president Dan Stein. "Democrat or Republican, any candidate who 'leans into' amnesty in 2010, as some advocates advise, is likely to share Martha Coakley's fate."Massachusetts is home to around 1 million foreign-born residents, or 14 percent of the state's population.For their part, immigrant advocates in Massachusetts say they aren't giving up on prospects for state and federal immigration reform. But Millona acknowledged, after Brown's win, "It makes it harder for us."Still, Millona said advocates hope to meet with Brown soon."In the state Senate, Mr. Brown did not always support issues that were important for immigrant communities," Millona said. "But the sober responsibility he demonstrated in his victory speech was very promising, as was his humble recognition that he has a lot to learn."Millona said despite the upcoming election she still expects Patrick to keep his promise on reforms from an advisory panel report with 131 recommendations, which include suggestions for more English classes for Massachusetts immigrants and allowing undocumented students to pay in-state tuition.The recommendations came more than a year after the governor sent the panel around the state to take public comment on immigration.But Steve Kropper, co-director of the bipartisan Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform, a group that opposes some reforms, said advocates can forget about some of those recommendations."We expect driver's license and in-state tuition for illegal immigrants to be left behind in the dust," said Kropper.Patrick's office did not respond to requests for comment. In his State of the State address Thursday, Patrick did not mention immigration reform.Carol Hardy-Fanta, director of the Center for Women in Politics and Public Policy at UMass-Boston, said while politicians may balk on reform proposals in the near future, it's unclear if immigrant voters and their advocates can sway state elections later.Latino and Brazil immigrants, for example, are some of the only population groups to grow in the state in the last 10 years, she said."They are not a group that votes in large numbers in Massachusetts," said Hardy-Fanta. "Then again, Coakley didn't reach out to them."

History will record January 19, 2010 as a day of transition for America; a day when a political bomb shell landed on politics as usual. While I initially thought the elections in 2006 and 2008 were simply bad election cycles for Republicans and a referendum on President Bush, I’m starting to change my mind and wonder if our country has actually entered a whole new era of history and politics. I wonder if the public wasn’t targeting Republicans, but instead incumbents and the Republicans were just the low hanging fruit as the party of power for the past decade. Like the Era of Good Feelings, Gilded Age, Progressive Era, Watergate, and the Reagan Era, America may be entering a new period of history, but what should it be called?

The election of Scott Brown of Massachusetts to the United States Senate may be an awakening and it may signal more change as populism returns to rotate the crops. Scott Brown may be a new and independent voice and he may represent the 41st Republican vote needed for a filibuster, but he will also be forever linked to the late Senator Ted Kennedy who held that seat from 1962 until his death in August. Like Brown, Kennedy also won the Senate seat in a special election. However, unlike Brown, Kennedy became the epitome of elitist liberalism on numerous issues including immigration. Kennedy was one of the Senate’s leading voices in support of amnesty and his leadership in passing the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 started the largest immigration wave in history. Scott Brown appears to be a sharp contrast to Kennedy on immigration, but most importantly his 41st vote severely complicates matters for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who still wants a healthcare bill and really wants another shot at “comprehensive” amnesty.

While there are a few pro-amnesty Republicans in the Senate like Sam Brownback and John McCain, even they realize the political stakes and don’t want to give Harry Reid a victory or endanger other Republicans, even if they personally support open borders. In effect, without the supermajority, the Democrats have less time to move an amnesty bill because Reid has to move at least one Republican to his side while holding all 57 Democrats and 2 independents, which is a tough lift and long negotiation process. Furthermore, immigration is still not the top issue for Democrats and it will take more time and negotiating to finish a healthcare bill before they move on to other issues, not to mention Appropriations season. And, if the 2005 and 2007 Senate amnesty bills are any indication, whatever comes from the Senate will contain numerous pages of legislation, numerous press conferences, and hearings in every committee of jurisdiction.

Reid has about 8 months to complete an amnesty bill before Senators return to their states to campaign and control the damage caused by an unpopular 111th Congress. Considering the slow process, the most likely threat for a Senate amnesty is a smaller bill like the DREAM Act after the elections and before the new Congress when lame duck Congressmen have one last shot to move their bills, and without political repercussions. More specifically, Reid’s Nevada senate seat is in cycle, he is trailing in the polls, and he has to return to Nevada to defend his record and convince voters to elect him to a 5th term. If he gets too involved in immigration, he has less time to raise money and defend his job in Congress. Not to mention the media and political winds blowing against him. Without a reliable Senate vote from Massachusetts, Reid’s entire policy agenda is now pushed off schedule, which reduces opportunities for comprehensive legislation of any type and threatens the reelection of the Democrat leader.

While I intend to write another blog about Harry Reid later in the election process discussing his polls, growth in office, and a conveniently located Mexican Consular office in downtown Las Vegas, the election shockwave from Massachusetts can be felt right now in Nevada and the grass roots populism that helped Scott Brown win a seat once held by the Kennedy family is ready to go after the Senate Majority Leader. If Reid is defeated, it will mean heavy apples falling high off the tree of liberty, not just low hanging fruit. Moreover, Reid is not likely to be the only apple to fall. We will have entered an age of the citizens.

Las Vegas Unversity Medical Center A report by the Las Vegas Review-Journal found that illegal aliens receiving dialysis treatment were costing the hospital more than $2 million per month. Nevada taxpayers are forced to pay for a situation that the report says "continues to worsen."

Officials say the lack of enforcing immigration laws is making a bad situation worse as the University Medical Center in Las Vegas looks to face a $70 million budgetary shortfall in 2010. They say attempts to encourage illegal aliens to receive the treatment in their home countries hasn't worked.

"The cost to our taxpayers is astronomical," said Lawrence Weekly, a Clark County commissioner and chairman of the UMC board of hospital trustees. "Many people are justifiably outraged. If this kind of thing goes on, we might have to close our doors. But we're governed by federal law on this issue so some way the federal government has to help us out. We just can't stand by and let people die in the streets. We wouldn't want that on our conscience."

The article says that a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said over the summer that Reid would push for increased funding for hospitals that helped illegal aliens, but the funding hasn't materialized.

The problem with illegal aliens and their cultural values got so bad at the El Cerrito Home Depot that they had to hire ARMED gaurds. Even so, I stopped the theft of power tools from the back of a pickup there, I was pulling up as the illegal aliens found a truck with some tools and a table saw in it, and they parked their little car next to it and started to gleefully unload the truck into the backseat of their car. I just pulled in front of their car and blocked them from leaving, and as luck would have it, the owner was coming out of the store, another illegal alien. They exchanged some loud words in Spanish, and the guys with the car just walked off, leaving their car with the stuff half out of it. The security gaurd came over, and called the police, I don't know what happened after that.

Every SINGLE time I go there, I see obvious illegal alien Hispanics roaming the parking lot looking in the back of trucks or trying door handles. At the Vallejo Home Depot, about 4 illegal aliens came up as I was unloading my cart and started grabbing my boards and putting them in my truck without asking, I was pissed at first, then got worried when they got mad at me for asking them to stop, and demanded money, I thought I was getting mugged. I told them "yeah, wait I'll get some" and got in the cab and tore out of there, they ran after me a bit in the parking lot and then went over to "help" an elderly guy with his cart. When I called the store to tell them what happened, they read some kind of script saying that "Home Depot does not support illegal immingration blah blah blah...." and I interupted and said that I wasn't complaining or had even mentioned race or illegal immigration, I'm just telling them that their parking lot has dangerous thugs in it harrasing the customers. They offered me a $25 gift certificate for my trouble.

I went to Home Depot in San Rafael last week and parked in the middle of the parking lot ,about halfway down. I looked forward and noticed two hispanic males walking slowly between the rows of cars, one was looking behind and around as the other was lifting up door handles on the cars and trucks. I can only assume they were looking for an open car to steal something out of. I have lived in Marin for over twenty years and have never seen so much crime as there is now, and when I read the stories it usually says the suspect was hispanic and is being held on a federal immigration charge (illegal alien). I have no hatred toward hispanics, but this is not the country I used to know. Why does the U .S . government allow these people to stay here and commit crimes against hard working loyal American citizens ?

City Journal Hispanic Family Values?Runaway illegitimacy is creating a new U.S. underclass.Heather Mac DonaldAutumn 2006

Unless the life chances of children raised by single mothers suddenly improve, the explosive growth of the U.S. Hispanic population over the next couple of decades does not bode well for American social stability. Hispanic immigrants bring near–Third World levels of fertility to America, coupled with what were once thought to be First World levels of illegitimacy. (In fact, family breakdown is higher in many Hispanic countries than here.) Nearly half of the children born to Hispanic mothers in the U.S. are born out of wedlock, a proportion that has been increasing rapidly with no signs of slowing down. Given what psychologists and sociologists now know about the much higher likelihood of social pathology among those who grow up in single-mother households, the Hispanic baby boom is certain to produce more juvenile delinquents, more school failure, more welfare use, and more teen pregnancy in the future.The government social-services sector has already latched onto this new client base; as the Hispanic population expands, so will the demands for a larger welfare state. Since conservative open-borders advocates have yet to acknowledge the facts of Hispanic family breakdown, there is no way to know what their solution to it is. But they had better come up with one quickly, because the problem is here—and growing.The dimensions of the Hispanic baby boom are startling. The Hispanic birthrate is twice as high as that of the rest of the American population. That high fertility rate—even more than unbounded levels of immigration—will fuel the rapid Hispanic population boom in the coming decades. By 2050, the Latino population will have tripled, the Census Bureau projects. One in four Americans will be Hispanic by mid-century, twice the current ratio. In states such as California and Texas, Hispanics will be in the clear majority. Nationally, whites will drop from near 70 percent of the total population in 2000 to just half by 2050. Hispanics will account for 46 percent of the nation’s added population over the next two decades, the Pew Hispanic Center reports.But it’s the fertility surge among unwed Hispanics that should worry policymakers. Hispanic women have the highest unmarried birthrate in the country—over three times that of whites and Asians, and nearly one and a half times that of black women, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Every 1,000 unmarried Hispanic women bore 92 children in 2003 (the latest year for which data exist), compared with 28 children for every 1,000 unmarried white women, 22 for every 1,000 unmarried Asian women, and 66 for every 1,000 unmarried black women. Forty-five percent of all Hispanic births occur outside of marriage, compared with 24 percent of white births and 15 percent of Asian births. Only the percentage of black out-of-wedlock births—68 percent—exceeds the Hispanic rate. But the black population is not going to triple over the next few decades.As if the unmarried Hispanic birthrate weren’t worrisome enough, it is increasing faster than among other groups. It jumped 5 percent from 2002 to 2003, whereas the rate for other unmarried women remained flat. Couple the high and increasing illegitimacy rate of Hispanics with their higher overall fertility rate, and you have a recipe for unstoppable family breakdown.The only bright news in this demographic disaster story concerns teen births. Overall teen childbearing in the U.S. declined for the 12th year in a row in 2003, having dropped by more than a third since 1991. Yet even here, Hispanics remain a cause for concern. The rate of childbirth for Mexican teenagers, who come from by far the largest and fastest-growing immigrant population, greatly outstrips every other group. The Mexican teen birthrate is 93 births per every 1,000 girls, compared with 27 births for every 1,000 white girls, 17 births for every 1,000 Asian girls, and 65 births for every 1,000 black girls. To put these numbers into international perspective, Japan’s teen birthrate is 3.9, Italy’s is 6.9, and France’s is 10. Even though the outsize U.S. teen birthrate is dropping, it continues to inflict unnecessary costs on the country, to which Hispanics contribute disproportionately.To grasp the reality behind those numbers, one need only talk to people working on the front lines of family breakdown. Social workers in Southern California, the national epicenter for illegal Hispanic immigrants and their progeny, are in despair over the epidemic of single parenting. Not only has illegitimacy become perfectly acceptable, they say, but so has the resort to welfare and social services to cope with it.Dr. Ana Sanchez delivers babies at St. Joseph’s Hospital in the city of Orange, California, many of them to Hispanic teenagers. To her dismay, they view having a child at their age as normal. A recent patient just had her second baby at age 17; the baby’s father is in jail. But what is “most alarming,” Sanchez says, is that the “teens’ parents view having babies outside of marriage as normal, too. A lot of the grandmothers are single as well; they never married, or they had successive partners. So the mom sends the message to her daughter that it’s okay to have children out of wedlock.”Sanchez feels almost personally involved in the problem: “I’m Hispanic myself. I wish I could find out what the Asians are doing right.” She guesses that Asian parents’ passion for education inoculates their children against teen pregnancy and the underclass trap. “Hispanics are not picking that up like the Asian kids,” she sighs.Conservatives who support open borders are fond of invoking “Hispanic family values” as a benefit of unlimited Hispanic immigration. Marriage is clearly no longer one of those family values. But other kinds of traditional Hispanic values have survived—not all of them necessarily ideal in a modern economy, however. One of them is the importance of having children early and often. “It’s considered almost a badge of honor for a young girl to have a baby,” says Peggy Schulze of Chrysalis House, an adoption agency in Fresno. (Fresno has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in California, typical of the state’s heavily Hispanic farm districts.) It is almost impossible to persuade young single Hispanic mothers to give up their children for adoption, Schulze says. “The attitude is: ‘How could you give away your baby?’ I don’t know how to break through.”The most powerful Hispanic family value—the tight-knit extended family—facilitates unwed child rearing. A single mother’s relatives often step in to make up for the absence of the baby’s father. I asked Mona, a 19-year-old parishioner at St. Joseph’s Church in Santa Ana, California, if she knew any single mothers. She laughed: “There are so many I can’t even name them.” Two of her cousins, aged 25 and 19, have children without having husbands. The situation didn’t seem to trouble this churchgoer too much. “They’ll be strong enough to raise them. It’s totally okay with us,” she said. “We’re very close; we’re there to support them. They’ll do just fine.”As Mona’s family suggests, out-of-wedlock child rearing among Hispanics is by no means confined to the underclass. The St. Joseph’s parishioners are precisely the churchgoing, blue-collar workers whom open-borders conservatives celebrate. Yet this community is as susceptible as any other to illegitimacy. Fifty-year-old Irma and her husband, Rafael, came legally from Mexico in the early 1970s. Rafael works in a meatpacking plant in Brea; they have raised five husky boys who attend church with them. Yet Irma’s sister—a homemaker like herself, also married to a factory hand—is now the grandmother of two illegitimate children, one by each daughter. “I saw nothing in the way my sister and her husband raised her children to explain it,” Irma says. “She gave them everything.” One of the fathers of Irma’s young nieces has four other children by a variety of different mothers. His construction wages are being garnished for child support, but he is otherwise not involved in raising his children.The fathers of these illegitimate children are often problematic in even more troubling ways. Social workers report that the impregnators of younger Hispanic women are with some regularity their uncles, not necessarily seen as a bad thing by the mother’s family. Alternatively, the father may be the boyfriend of the girl’s mother, who then continues to stay with the grandmother. Older men seek out young girls in the belief that a virgin cannot get pregnant during her first intercourse, and to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.The tradition of starting families young and expand- ing them quickly can come into conflict with more modern American mores. Ron Storm, the director of the Hillview Acres foster-care home in Chino, tells of a 15-year-old girl who was taken away from the 21-year-old father of her child by a local child-welfare department. The boyfriend went to jail, charged with rape. But the girl’s parents complained about the agency’s interference, and eventually both the girl and her boyfriend ended up going back to Mexico, presumably to have more children. “At 15, as the Quinceañera tradition celebrates, you’re considered ready for marriage,” says Storm. Or at least for childbearing; the marriage part is disappearing.But though older men continue to take advantage of younger women, the age gap between the mother and the father of an illegitimate child is quickly closing. Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino Counties tries to teach young fathers to take responsibility for their children. “We’re seeing a lot more 13- and 14-year-old fathers,” says Kathleen Collins, v.p. of health education. The day before we spoke, Scott Montoya, an Orange County sheriff’s deputy, arrested two 14-year-old boys who were bragging about having sexual relations with a cafeteria worker from an Olive Garden restaurant. “It’s now all about getting girls pregnant when you’re age 15,” he says. One 18-year-old in the Planned Parenthood fathers’ program has two children by two different girls and is having sex with five others, says health worker Jason Warner. “A lot of [the adolescent sexual behavior] has to do with getting respect from one’s peers,” observes Warner.Normally, the fathers, of whatever age, take off. “The father may already be married or in prison or doing drugs,” says Amanda Gan, director of operations for Toby’s House, a maternity home in Dana Point, California. Mona, the 19-year-old parishioner at St. Joseph’s Church, says that the boys who impregnated her two cousins are “nowhere to be found.” Her family knows them but doesn’t know if they are working or in jail.Two teen mothers at the Hillview Acres home represent the outer edge of Hispanic family dysfunction. Yet many aspects of their lives are typical. Though these teenagers’ own mothers were unusually callous and irresponsible, the social milieu in which they were raised is not unusual.Irene’s round, full face makes her look younger than her 14 years, certainly too young to be a mother. But her own mother’s boyfriend repeatedly forced sex on her, with the mother’s acquiescence. The result was Irene’s baby, Luz. Baby Luz has an uncle her own age, Irene’s new 13-month-old brother. Like Irene, Irene’s mother had her first child at 14, and produced five more over the next 16 years, all of whom went into foster care. Irene’s father committed suicide before she was old enough to know him. The four fathers of her siblings are out of the picture, too: one of them, the father of her seven-year-old brother and five-year-old sister, was deported back to Mexico after he showed up drunk for a visit with his children, in violation of his probation conditions.Irene is serene and articulate—remarkably so, considering that in her peripatetic early life in Orange County she went to school maybe twice a week. She likes to sing and to read books that are sad, she says, especially books by Dave Pelzer, a child-abuse victim who has published three best-selling memoirs about his childhood trauma. She says she will never get married: “I don’t want another man in my life. I don’t want that experience again.”Eighteen-year-old Jessica at least escaped rape, but her family experiences were bad enough. The large-limbed young woman, whose long hair is pulled back tightly from her heart-shaped face, grew up in the predominantly Hispanic farming community of Indio in the Coachella Valley. She started “partying hard” in fifth grade, she says—at around the same time that her mother, separated from her father, began using drugs and going clubbing. By the eighth grade, Jessica and her mother were drinking and smoking marijuana together. Jessica’s family had known her boyfriend’s family since she was four; when she had her first child by him—she was 14 and he was 21—her mother declared philosophically that she had always known that it would happen. “It was okay with her, so long as he continued to give her drugs.”Jessica originally got pregnant to try to clean up her life, she says. “I knew what I was doing was not okay, so having a baby was a way for me to stop doing what I was doing. In that sense, the baby was planned.” She has not used drugs since her first pregnancy, though she occasionally drinks. After her daughter was born, she went to live with her boyfriend in a filthy trailer without plumbing; they scrounged food from dumpsters, despite the income from his illegal drug business. They planned to get married, but by the time she got pregnant again with a son, “We were having a lot of problems. We’d be holding hands, and he’d be looking at other girls. I didn’t want him to touch me.” Eventually, the county welfare agency removed her and put her in foster care with her two children.Both Jessica and her caddish former boyfriend illustrate the evanescence of the celebrated Hispanic “family values.” Her boyfriend’s family could not be more traditional. Two years ago, Jessica went back to Mexico to celebrate her boyfriend’s parents’ 25th wedding anniversary and the renewal of their wedding vows. Jessica’s own mother got married at 15 to her father, who was ten years her senior. Her father would not let his wife work; she was a “stay-at-home wife,” Jessica says. But don’t blame the move to the U.S. for the behavior of younger generations; the family crack-up is happening even faster in Latin America.Jessica’s mother may have been particularly negligent, but Jessica’s experiences are not so radically different from those of her peers. “Everybody’s having babies now,” she says. “The Coachella Valley is filled with girls’ pregnancies. Some girls live with their babies’ dads; they consider them their husbands.” These cohabiting relationships rarely last, however, and a new cohort of fatherless children goes out into the world.Despite the strong family support, the prevalence of single parenting among Hispanics is producing the inevitable slide into the welfare system. “The girls aren’t marrying the guys, so they are married to the state,” Dr. Sanchez observes. Hispanics now dominate the federal Women, Infants, and Children free food program; Hispanic enrollment grew over 25 percent from 1996 to 2002, while black enrollment dropped 12 percent and white enrollment dropped 6.5 percent. Illegal immigrants can get WIC and other welfare programs for their American-born children. If Congress follows President Bush’s urging and grants amnesty to most of the 11 million illegal aliens in the country today, expect the welfare rolls to skyrocket as the parents themselves become eligible.Amy Braun works for Mary’s Shelter, a home for young single mothers who are homeless or in crisis, in Orange County, California. It has become “culturally okay” for the Hispanic population to use the shelter and welfare system, Braun says. A case manager at a program for pregnant homeless women in the city of Orange observes the same acculturation to the social-services sector, with its grievance mongering and sense of victimhood. “I’ll have women in my office on their fifth child, when the others have already been placed in foster care,” says Anita Berry of Casa Teresa. “There’s nothing shameful about having multiple children that you can’t care for, and to be pregnant again, because then you can blame the system.”The consequences of family breakdown are now being passed down from one generation to the next, in an echo of the black underclass. “The problems are deeper and wider,” says Berry. “Now you’re getting the second generation of foster care and group home residents. The dysfunction is multigenerational.”The social-services complex has responded with barely concealed enthusiasm to this new flood of clients. As Hispanic social problems increase, so will the government sector that ministers to them. In July, a New York Times editorial, titled young latinas and a cry for help, pointed out the elevated high school dropout rates and birthrates among Hispanic girls. A quarter of all Latinas are mothers by the age of 20, reported the Times. With the usual melodrama that accompanies the pitch for more government services, the Times designated young Latinas as “endangered” in the same breath that it disclosed that they are one of the fastest-growing segments of the population. “The time to help is now,” said the Times—by which it means ratcheting up the taxpayer-subsidized social-work industry.In response to the editorial, Carmen Barroso, regional director of International Planned Parenthood Federation/Western Hemisphere Region, proclaimed in a letter to the editor the “urgent need for health care providers, educators and advocates to join the sexual and reproductive health movement to ensure the fundamental right to services for young Latinas.”Wherever these “fundamental rights” might come from, Barroso’s call nevertheless seems quite superfluous, since there is no shortage of taxpayer-funded “services” for troubled Latinas—or Latinos. The schools in California’s San Joaquin Valley have day care for their students’ babies, reports Peggy Schulze of Chrysalis House. “The girls get whatever they need—welfare, medical care.” Advocates for young unwed moms in New York’s South Bronx are likewise agitating for more day-care centers in high schools there, reports El Diario/La Prensa. A bill now in Congress, the Latina Adolescent Suicide Prevention Act, aims to channel $10 million to “culturally competent” social agencies to improve the self-esteem of Latina girls and to provide “support services” to their families and friends if they contemplate suicide.The trendy “case management” concept, in which individual “cases” become the focal point around which a solar system of social workers revolves, has even reached heavily Hispanic elementary and middle schools. “We have a coordinator, who brings in a collaboration of agencies to deal with the issues that don’t allow a student to meet his academic goals, such as domestic violence or drugs,” explains Sylvia Rentria, director of the Family Resource Center at Berendo Middle School in Los Angeles. “We can provide individual therapy.” Rentria offers the same program at nearby Hoover Elementary School for up to 100 students.This July, Rentria launched a new session of Berendo’s Violence Intervention Program for parents of children who are showing signs of gang involvement and other antisocial behavior. Ghady M., 55 and a “madre soltera” (single mother), like most of the mothers in the program, has been called in because her 16-year-old son, Christian, has been throwing gang signs at school, cutting half his classes, and ending up in the counseling office every day. The illegal Guatemalan is separated from her partner, who was “muy malo,” she says; he was probably responsible for her many missing teeth. (The detectives in the heavily Hispanic Rampart Division of the Los Angeles Police Department, which includes the Berendo school, spend inordinate amounts of time on domestic violence cases.) Though Ghady used to work in a factory on Broadway in downtown L.A.— often referred to as Little Mexico City—she now collects $580 in welfare payments and $270 in food stamps for her two American-born children.Christian is a husky smart aleck in a big white T-shirt; his fashionably pomaded hair stands straight up. He goes to school but doesn’t do homework, he grins; and though he is not in a gang, he says, he has friends who are. Keeping Ghady and Christian company at the Violence Intervention Program is Ghady’s grandniece, Carrie, a lively ten-year-old. Carrie lives with her 26-year-old mother but does not know her father, who also sired her 12-year-old brother. Her five-year-old brother has a different father.Yet for all these markers of social dysfunction, fatherless Hispanic families differ from the black underclass in one significant area: many of the mothers and the absent fathers work, even despite growing welfare use. The former boyfriend of Jessica, the 18-year-old mother at the Hillview Acres foster home, works in construction and moonlights on insulation jobs; whether he still deals drugs is unknown. Jessica is postponing joining her father in Texas until she finishes high school, because once she moves in with him, she will feel obligated to get a job to help the family finances. The mother of Hillview’s 14-year-old Irene used to fix soda machines in Anaheim, California, though she got fired because she was lazy, Irene says. Now, under court compulsion, she works in a Lunchables factory in Santa Ana, a condition of getting her children back from foster care. The 18-year-old Lothario and father of two, whom Planned Parenthood’s Jason Warner is trying to counsel, works at a pet store. The mother of Carrie, the vivacious ten-year-old sitting in on Berendo Middle School’s Violence Intervention Program, makes pizza at a Papa John’s pizza outlet.How these two value systems—a lingering work ethic and underclass mating norms—will interact in the future is anyone’s guess. Orange County sheriff’s deputy Montoya says that the older Hispanic generation’s work ethic is fast disappearing among the gangbanging youngsters whom he sees. “Now, it’s all about fast money, drugs, and sex.” It may be that the willingness to work will plummet along with marriage rates, leading to even greater social problems than are now rife among Hispanics. Or it may be that the two contrasting practices will remain on parallel tracks, creating a new kind of underclass: a culture that tolerates free-floating men who impregnate women and leave, like the vast majority of black men, yet who still labor in the noncriminal economy. The question is whether, if the disposition to work remains relatively strong, a working parent will inoculate his or her illegitimate children against the worst degradations that plague black ghettos.From an intellectual standpoint, this is a fascinating social experiment, one that academicians are—predictably—not attuned to. But the consequences will be more than intellectual: they may severely strain the social fabric. Nevertheless, it is an experiment that we seem destined to see to its end. Tisha Roberts, a supervisor at an Orange County, California, institution that assists children in foster care, has given up hope that the illegitimacy rate will taper off. “It’s going to continue to grow,” she says, “until we can put birth control in the water.”

MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.comThe first thing a LA RAZA DEM does when he/she wakes up is ask the MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY FOR MEXICAN SUPREMACY – LA RAZA “THE RACE” what their assignment is.LA RAZA SEN. HARRY REID NOT ONLY HANDS OVER MILLIONS IN TAX DOLLARS TO LA RAZA FASCIST PARTY, HE ALONG WITH OBAMA, FEINSTEIN, BOXER, PELOSI, GUTIERREZ CAN SABOTAGE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ENOUGH IN THEIR ENDLESS EFFORTS TO BUY THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES.MORE ON THE LA RAZA DEMS PUSH TO SELL OUT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AT MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com

* GET ON FAIRusa.org email news on the MEXICAN INVASION AND OCCUPATION.

Senators Push for Immigration Measures in Jobs BillIn anticipation of jobs legislation Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid intends to bring to the floor this week (see, e.g., CBS, February 5, 2010), true immigration reformers in the Senate are seeking to add measures that would improve immigration enforcement while simultaneously helping the American worker. Last week, Senators Sessions (R-AL), Grassley (R-IA), Coburn, (R-OK), Vitter (R-LA), Chambliss (R-GA), Isakson (R-GA), Bunning (R-KY), and Inhofe (R-OK), sent a letter to Reid asking that he add these measures to any jobs legislation aimed at reducing unemployment in the United States. (See text of letter, February 4, 2010). This push to improve immigration enforcement came at the same time the Labor Department released new data showing there are currently 14.8 million Americans who are officially unemployed. (Bureau of Labor Statistics, February 5, 2010). Meanwhile, there are between 7 and 8 million illegal aliens in the U.S. labor market, many of whom have only recently entered the country and are competing with Americans for jobs.Despite these numbers, statistics show that the federal government failed to enforce our immigration laws in 2009. Between fiscal years 2008 and 2009, administrative arrests of illegal aliens dropped 68 percent; criminal arrests of illegal aliens dropped 60 percent; indictments of illegal aliens dropped 58 percent; and convictions of illegal aliens dropped 63 percent. (See FAIR’s Legislative Update, November 23, 2009). To help the American worker, these Senators hope to introduce amendments that:• Permanently reauthorize E-Verify;• Allow employers to use E-Verify to verify the work authorization of current employees; • Reinstate the No-Match Rule, which directs employers to take specific actions upon learning that their employees’ names and social security numbers do not match; • Increase penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens; and • Prohibit employers from deducting wages paid to illegal alien workers. The jobs bill is expected to be on the Senate floor as early as Monday. Stay tuned to FAIR for more details as this debate continues.*latimes.comOpinionImmigration reform, againObama and the Democrats want another crack at it, but nothing is certain.By Jeffrey KayeNovember 23, 2009If any one person embodies the complex politics of immigration reform, it is Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. As governor of Arizona in 2007, she signed one of the nation's toughest state immigration laws, the Legal Arizona Workers Act, which imposed harsh penalties on businesses that knowingly employed undocumented workers. Now, as the nation's top immigration official, she will be asked to weigh in on a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of that law. The case comes before the U.S. Supreme Court as Washington once again revives efforts to overhaul the nation's immigration laws.

At the time she signed the bill, Napolitano, citing the failure of congressional leaders to take action, insisted that "states like Arizona have no choice but to take strong action to discourage the flow of illegal immigration." Under the law, businesses that willfully hire illegal immigrants can be shut down temporarily or, for a second offense, completely -- a "business death penalty," as Napolitano called it.

"Arizona has taken the most aggressive action in the country against employers who knowingly or intentionally hire undocumented workers," she wrote. The measure was one of hundreds of immigration laws passed across the country, largely as a reaction to the stalemate over the issue in Washington.

The Arizona statute came under immediate attack from disparate groups rarely found on the same side of the table. Legal briefs opposing the law were filed by farmers, contractors and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. The opponents' key legal argument has been that immigration policy should be set by the federal government, not by state and local jurisdictions.

Now that she's exchanged her state hat for a federal one, it will not be surprising if Napolitano opposes the measure she made law. As a governor who grappled politically and fiscally with the consequences of a massive influx of illegal immigrants, she asserted the authority of her state. But that was then. Now, as the Obama administration's point person on the issue, Napolitano is likely to reflect the position her boss took as a candidate, supporting "comprehensive immigration reform so local communities do not continue to take matters into their own hands."

Napolitano's attitudes toward immigration have hardened over the years. First elected governor in 2002 with support from the Latino electorate, she opposed a 2004 Arizona ballot measure that sought to bar illegal immigrants from receiving some public social services. The following year, voicing skepticism about the effectiveness of Bush administration plans to improve fences at the border, she famously proclaimed, "You show me a 50-foot wall, and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder." However, since becoming chief of the Homeland Security Department, the agency responsible for the border fence, she has promised to complete the unfinished portions and has stepped up immigration audits of employers.

Similarly, as officials from Napolitano's agency and the White House work with bipartisan congressional staff to prepare immigration bills that most likely will be introduced in December and January, the consistent theme has been toughness. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who as chairman of the Senate's immigration subcommittee will take a lead role in drafting legislation, has said that a bipartisan immigration bill is doomed "if my colleagues on the other side of the aisle do not believe that Democrats are serious about enforcement." Schumer even denounced use of the term "undocumented workers," suggesting that it conveys legitimacy and signals that the government "is not serious about combating illegal immigration."

In a speech this month laying out the need for reform, Napolitano emphasized a "three-legged stool" approach -- regulating the flow of immigrants, dealing with those who are already here, but beginning, she said, with "fair, reliable enforcement."

Immigration reform advocates trying to build momentum to produce a new law point to favorable poll results on immigration and a desire by both parties to be responsive to Latino voters. But proponents will face stiff obstacles, particularly if a bill includes provisions for what business lobbyists call "future flow" -- allowing employers to bring in foreign workers. Unions worry that without safeguards, imported labor will displace American workers.

The larger stumbling block will be the "tough and fair pathway to earned legal status," as Napolitano put it. It was the legalization aspect of her speech that garnered most news media attention, even though it basically restated President Obama's campaign pledge to bring "the millions of illegal immigrants in this country out of the shadows . . . [by meeting] a number of requirements -- including registering, paying a fine, passing a criminal background check, fully paying all taxes and learning English."

History shows that anti-immigrant sentiment is generally highest during economic downturns, and groups favoring immigration restrictions, such as the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, are already citing high U.S. unemployment as a reason to oppose immigration bills. FAIR is joining with the "tea party" crowd that emerged during the healthcare debate, a loud and angry coalition that will be unswayed by the efforts of Napolitano, the Obama administration and their congressional allies to decorate immigration reform packages with law-and-order ribbons.

Jeffrey Kaye is a journalist and the author of "Moving Millions: How Coyote Capitalism Fuels Global Immigration," to be published in April. jeffreykaye.net*THIS IS WHAT 20 YEARS OF BUSH, HILLARY, BILLARY, BUSH & OBAMA have done to this nation! Meanwhile the number of BILLIONAIRES and ILLEGALS in this nation quadrupled! *WSWS.org – get on their free NO ADS news mails!Unemployment rises in 29 US statesBy Patrick Martin 23 November 2009Unemployment rates rose in 29 of the 50 US states in October, according to a report released by the federal Department of Labor Friday, with California, Florida, South Carolina and Delaware reporting all-time highs since 1976, when the Labor Department began reporting statewide totals. The District of Columbia also had its highest-ever official jobless total.The jobless rate in California, the largest US state, hit 12.5 percent, while the jobless rate in Florida, the fourth-largest state, was 11.2 percent. The 29 states showing increased unemployment was itself a rise over September, when 22 states had rising unemployment figures. Eight states showed no change in the unemployment rate, while 13 states reported a drop.Michigan still had the nation's highest unemployment rate in October: 15.1 percent, slightly below the September rate of 15.3 percent. It was followed by Nevada at 13 percent, Rhode Island at 12.9 percent, California at 12.5 percent and South Carolina's 12.1 percent. All told, 13 states were above the national average of 10.2 percent (the others being Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, Oregon, Alabama, North Carolina and Georgia).Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Indiana, all centers of auto production, saw slight increases in the actual number of employed workers, partly as a consequence of the cash-for-clunkers program, which expired in September.The actual number of jobs reported in Michigan rose by 38,600, the second largest for any state, trailing only Texas, which added 41,700 jobs, largely in education, health care and government. The Texas unemployment rate nonetheless increased, to 8.3 percent.Every one of the 50 states has a higher unemployment rate than one year ago, and all have a lower total number of jobs than in October 2008. Since the US recession began officially in December 2007, total US unemployment has increased by 8.2 million people.While the state-by-state variation was quite pronounced—ranging from Michigan’s 15.1 percent down to North Dakota’s 4.2 percent—the regional variation was far less. The Western US had the highest unemployment rate, at 10.8 percent, with the Northeast showing the lowest rate, 9 percent, and the Midwest and South in between.These figures indicate catastrophic levels of social distress, given that the official unemployment rate is effectively doubled once involuntary part-time and so-called discouraged workers are included.Several other reports have been released that suggest the human dimensions of the economic and social crisis in the United States.The Mortgage Bankers Association reported that 14 percent of borrowers were in trouble on their mortgages during the third quarter (July to September 2009), a record for the industry. Unemployment, rather than the collapse in home prices, was the biggest factor in delinquencies, the survey found.The 14 percent rate translates into 7.4 million households, with approximately one third in foreclosure, and two thirds delinquent on payments but not yet in foreclosure. This compares to 5 million households in trouble one year ago.A Census Bureau survey, based on figures collected in 2007, at the early stages of the current slump, found that 20 percent of Americans needed outside assistance to pay for basic needs like food, mortgage or utilities. Nine percent of households had to resort to food pantries and soup kitchens for food. More than one million households were without a refrigerator or stove.A report in the Detroit Free Press Sunday found that record numbers of Michigan residents were receiving food stamps, Medicaid and other forms of social assistance, with new applicants, largely workers recently laid off from their jobs, jamming social service offices throughout the state.Some 1.8 million people were receiving Medicaid benefits in Michigan last month, and 1.65 million receiving food assistance. More than 20 percent of the population was dependent on some form of aid.Nearly one million people were receiving food or Medicaid in Wayne County, the state’s largest, which includes the city of Detroit. Even in the once largely affluent Oakland County suburbs, some 224,000 people were received food assistance or Medicaid in October.GOOGLE OBAMA AND GOLDMAN SACHS! Meanwhile, the comptroller of New York state, in a report issued November 17, projected that Wall Street profits in 2009 would top the record set in 2006, at the height of the speculative bubble. The four largest investment firms—Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch (now the investment arm of Bank of America), and JP Morgan Chase—made $22.5 billion in profits during the first nine months of the year.Member firms of the New York Stock Exchange made a record $35.7 billion in trading profits during the first six months of 2009, shattering the previous record, set in 2000, by nearly $9 billion. The top six US banks have already set aside $112 billion for salaries and bonuses in the first nine months of the year, and could easily shatter the 12-month record total of $162 billion set in 2007, once mammoth year-end bonuses are reported.In his Saturday Internet and radio speech, recorded at the end of his east Asian trip, President Obama rejected any special job-creation measures. Claiming that the US economy was now emerging from recession, Obama declared, “In order to keep growing, we need to spend less, save more, and get our federal deficit under control.”Obama touted the forum on economic growth he will convene at the White House on December 3, but added, “It is important that we do not make any ill-considered decisions—even with the best of intentions—particularly at a time when our resources are so limited.” OBAMA NEVER SAID THE STUPID GRINGO’S “RESOURCES” WHERE LIMITED WHEN HE WAS HANDING OUT BILLIONS TO BANKSTER CRIMINALS! THIS GUY IS GEORGE W BUSH IN DRAG WANTING TO BE BITCH HILLARY!“I will not let up until businesses start hiring again,” he said, language that means new jobs will come only from private capitalists, not through the public sector.The list of those Obama is inviting to the White House forum was revealing: “CEOs and small business owners, economists and financial experts, as well as representatives from labor unions and nonprofit groups.” Not a single worker or unemployed person will be involved.

BECOME A FOLLOWER OF THE BLOG! CUT – PASTE – POST ON CL AND EMAIL BROADCAST. YOUR ELECTED REPS ARE WORKING FOR ILLEGALS, AND WALL ST. NOT YOU!

*

MOST OF THE FORTUNE 500 ARE GENEROUS DONORS TO LA RAZA – THE MEXICAN FASCIST POLITICAL PARTY

“The principal beneficiaries of our current immigration policy are affluent Americans who hire immigrants at substandard wages for low-end work. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates that American workers lose $190 billion annually in depressed wages caused by the constant flooding of the labor market at the low-wage end.” Christian Science Monitor*Lou Dobbs Tonight Monday, February 16, 2009 Construction of the 670 miles of border fence mandated by the Bush administration is almost complete. The Border Patrol says the new fencing, more agents and new technology have reduced illegal alien apprehensions. But fence opponents are trying to stop the last few miles from being finished. We will have a full report, tonight.

Plus, even open border advocates agree that the most effective way of fighting illegal immigration is to crack down on the employment of illegal aliens. Yet, those same groups are opposed to E-Verify, which has an initial accuracy rate of 99.6% making it one the most accurate programs ever. E-Verify was stripped from the stimulus bill but who stripped it out and who is opposed to verifying employment status is still not clear.

*“The president's straddling can work for the time being. But unless he wants to end up in the sawdust, acrobat Obama will eventually have to hop on one horse and lead the way. That would have to be the horse named "Enforcement First." CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR *

While Obama and his LA RAZA DEMS sabotage our borders to ease illegals into our jobs, refuse to enforce laws prohibiting the hiring of illegals, sabotages E-VERIFY which could end the MEXICAN OCCUPATION over night, one CA REP IS WORKING FOR AMERICANS AND AMERICAN JOBS!

*

Rep. Brian Bilbray believes the laws do apply to illegals, and has fought against the LA RAZA DEMS push for open borders, amnesty and no e-verify. He represents the 50the district, which includes San Diego, Escondido, Carlsbad, and Encinitas. All under Mexican occupation!’

*

Effort to Curb Illegal Workers' Hiring BlockedBy Spencer S. HsuWashington Post Staff WriterThursday, October 11, 2007; 2:04 PM A federal judge barred the Bush administration yesterday from launching a planned crackdown on U.S. companies that employ illegal immigrants, warning of its potentially "staggering" impact on law-abiding workers and companies. In a firm rebuke of the White House, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer of San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction against the president's plan to press employers to fire as many as 8.7 million workers with suspect Social Security numbers, starting this fall. President Bush made the effort the centerpiece of a re-energized enforcement drive against illegal immigration in August after the Senate rejected his proposal to overhaul immigration laws. But the court ruling -- sought by major American labor, business and farm organizations -- highlighted the chasm that the issue has opened between the Republican Party and its traditional business allies. The case also called attention to the gulf between Washington rhetoric about the need to curtail illegal immigration and the economic reality that many U.S. employers rely on illegal labor, as well as to the government's inability for nearly three decades to develop adequate tools for identifying undocumented workers.

FIGHTING FOR ILLEGALS, THE U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE – MOUTH PIECE FOR THE FORTUNE 500, MOST OF WHICH ARE LA RAZA DONORS. THE MEXICAN OCCUPATION IS SAID TO DEPRESS WAGES FROM $300 TO $400 BILLION A YEAR. MOST JUDGES ARE CORPORATE OWNED, AND VOTE THE CORPORATE INTERESTS.In a 22-page ruling, Breyer said the plaintiffs -- an unusual coalition that included the AFL-CIO, the American Civil Liberties Union and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- had raised serious questions about the legality of the administration's plan to mail Social Security "no-match" letters to 140,000 U.S. employers. "There can be no doubt that the effects of the rule's implementation will be severe," Breyer wrote, resulting in "irreparable harm to innocent workers and employers." The government letters are intended to warn employers for the first time that they must resolve questions about their employees' identities or fire them within 90 days. If they do not, employers could face "stiff penalties," including fines and even criminal prosecution, for violating a federal law that bars knowingly employing illegal workers, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said when he announced the plan Aug. 10. The plaintiffs convinced the judge that the Social Security Administration database includes so many errors -- incorporated in the records of about 9.5 million people in 2003 alone -- that its use in firings would unfairly discriminate against tens of thousands of legal workers, including native-born and naturalized U.S. citizens, and cause major workforce disruptions that would burden companies. "The government's proposal to disseminate no-match letters affecting more than eight million workers will, under the mandated time line, result in the termination of employment to lawfully employed workers," the judge wrote. "Moreover the threat of criminal prosecution . . . reflects a major change in DHS policy." Breyer also said that the government may have ignored a 1980 law, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, that requires it to weigh the cost of imposing new regulations that would significantly burden small-business owners. Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the Chamber of Commerce, said the ruling shows that "the government cannot do anything it wants simply in the name of enforcement. They've got to be careful about building their record and complying with the law." In a statement, AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney said: "This is a significant step towards overturning this unlawful rule, which would give employers an even stronger way to keep workers from freely forming unions. . . . More than 70% of SSA discrepancies refer to U.S. citizens." Chertoff expressed disappointment with the decision and said the administration will continue to aggressively enforce immigration laws while considering an appeal, which plaintiffs' attorneys said could take at least nine months. "Today's ruling is yet another reminder of why we need Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform," Chertoff said. "The American people have been loud and clear about their desire to see our nation's immigration laws enforced." Several analysts said the Bush administration's plan appeared to be designed to push business interests back into the debate by demonstrating that the failure of legislative reform efforts would carry costs, and to reassure conservative lawmakers who oppose illegal immigration that the White House is able and willing to crack down on offenders. Doris Meissner, former commissioner of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service and now a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute in Washington, said the ruling "shows how ineffective the current laws are." "It reinforces the opinion that many of us hold that until you have a better legal framework -- which requires new legislation -- we're stuck very much with the status quo," Meissner said.

BRIAN BILBRAY “WHAT PART OF ILLEGAL DOES JUDGE BREYER NOT UNDERSTAND? BREYER IS PROBABLY AN ELECTED JUDGE THAT IS FINANCED BY THE BUSINESS INTERESTS THAT BENEFIT FROM DEPRESSED WAGES SUBSIDIZED BY TAX PAYERS WITH WELFARE, FREE MEDICAL AT EMERGENCY ROOM HOSPITALS. "At a time when the federal government is finally trying to enforce current immigration law, we cannot have activist judges stand in the way of doing what is right." Brian Bilbray

In a statement, Rep. Brian P. Bilbray (R-Calif.), an opponent of Bush's approach who won election to the House last year on the issue, criticized the court. "What part of 'illegal' does Judge Breyer not understand?" he said. "At a time when the federal government is finally trying to enforce current immigration law, we cannot have activist judges stand in the way of doing what is right." *WIDESPREAD MISUSE OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS BY ILLEGALS*The scope of the problem is uncontested. A three-year government audit ending in 2001 found "widespread" misuse of Social Security numbers by illegal immigrants, who often present fake or fraudulent documents to obtain jobs. Overall, 7.2 million illegal immigrants account for at least 10 percent of low-skilled U.S. workers and 5 percent of the total U.S. workforce, according to a Pew Hispanic Center analysis of 2005 census data. Illegal immigrants make up even greater portions of workers in specific industries, including 24 percent in farming, 17 percent in cleaning, 14 percent in construction and 12 percent in food preparation. But the government's record in developing tools to screen such workers is spotty, largely because of successful efforts by employers, labor unions and civil rights groups to water them down. A government program to verify the validity of new hires' Social Security numbers, proposed in concept in 1981 and launched in 1996, remains voluntary and covers only about 23,000 of 8 million U.S. employers. It is also hampered by a high false-alarm rate and the limited ability to detect identity theft involving stolen or fraudulent numbers. Between June 2004 and May 2006, it erroneously rejected 11 percent of foreign-born U.S. citizens and 1.3 percent of authorized foreign-born noncitizens, according to a report provided to Congress. ISN’T BLAGOJEVICH IN PRISON YET?DIANNE FEINSTEIN HAS LONG HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER S.F. HOTEL. NANCY PELOSI AT HER $20 MILLION NAPA WINERY. BOTH FIGHT E-VERIFY.In protest, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) signed legislation in August that bars companies in his state from participating in the program until it is 99 percent accurate. The federal government has mailed Social Security no-match letters to employers since 1994, but such notices were generally silent about workers' immigration status and employers did not face liability. In June 2006, the Department of Homeland Security proposed using the letters to combat immigration fraud involving existing employees, and it finalized its plans this summer. The AFL-CIO and the ACLU filed suit to halt the Sept. 4 start of the mailings, and they were joined by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the trade associations for the agriculture, restaurant and construction industries. On Aug. 31, U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney issued a temporary restraining order pending an Oct. 1 hearing before Breyer, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1997 and is the brother of Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer. **HISPANDERING FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES. BOTH PARTIES ARE EXPERTS AT IT!

Obama soft on illegals enforcement

Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday. Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.

The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans otherwise would hold. *WHILE BARACK OBAMA GIVES HIMSELF A “B+” (HIS BANKSTERS GAVE HIM AN “A+” ) JUDICIAL WATCH’S GRADE IS A BIT MORE REALISTIC:JUDICIAL WATCH.orgWith trillion dollar bailouts, government-run healthcare, banks and car companies, ACORN corruption, attacks on conservative media, illegal alien amnesty, unprecedented and dangerous new rights for terrorists, perks for campaign donors—this is the Obama legacy—and we haven't even gotten through the first year of his presidency!*You can contact President Obama and let him know of your opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens: http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/

REAL ! IMMIGRATION REFORM ! NOT FOR WALL STREET, MEXICO, OR NEW VOTERS FOR THE LA RAZA DEMS! THIS IS REFORM TO GET OUR COUNTRY BACK FROM THE MEXICAN INVASION AND OCCUPATION.WHO IS FIGHTING AGAINST REAL IMMIGRATION REFORM AND FOR AMNESTY, OPEN BORDERS, NO E-VERIFY, NO I.C.E ENFORCEMENT:

BARACK OBAMA, THE HISPANDERING PRESIDENT BUYING ILLEGALS’ VOTES!THE LA RAZA “THE (MEXICAN) RACE” DEMS, CONGRESSIONAL HISPANIC CAUCUS (SEE LIST BELOW)MEXICO – We are Mexico’s welfare system. Since the amnesty to end the invasion we have taken 1.5 million illegals per year in. 38 million of Mexico’s POOR, ILLITERATE, CRIMINAL and frequently PREGNANT. We are also Mexico’s prison system. Prison cost for illegals in CA alone is over a billion per year, and yet the state had Mexican gang problems everywhere!U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE! The front for the corporate interests and to fight against living wages. There is a reason why Wall St. demands OPEN BORDERS and NO E-VERIFY! CNN calculates that the Mexican occupation depresses wages for legals $300 to $400 BILLION PER YEAR!FORTUNE 500, major donors to LA RAZA – the Mexican political party funded by Wall St, your taxes, and Mexico.DEMOCRATIC PARTY – has long sold out the American people for the benefit of illegals and their illegal votes!

EMAIL BROADCAST THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW! EVEN AT TIME OF SOARING DEFICITS, CRIMINAL MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS, MEXICAN GANG VIOLENCE, AND WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS, THE DEMS ARE AT THIS VERY MOMENT LOOKING TO GRANT AMNESTY TO 38 MILLION ILLEGALS! (SEE MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com)

Take Action Before Amnesty Hits the Floor!Call Your Representatives and Tell Them to Co-Sponsor the Chaffetz Resolution!Today, Congressman Chaffetz (R-UT), along with Congressmen Hunter (R-CA), Kratovil (D-MD), and Nye (D-VA), introduced a bipartisan resolution in the House of Representatives that calls on Members of Congress to support TRUE immigration reform. This resolution offers the perfect opportunity for you to tell Congressional Leadership that you want their legislative agenda to reflect YOUR priorities, not theirs – and not those of special interests. Please call your Representatives TODAY, and tell them to co-sponsor this important Resolution. The two-page Chaffetz Resolution is remarkably simple and its message is clear. It states that it is the sense of the House of Representatives that:(1) E-Verify should be mandatory, and that worksite enforcement policies should hold both employers and illegal employees responsible for violations of immigration law;(2) Installing and sustaining border security infrastructure and manpower is a critical responsibility of the federal government; and(3) Any immigration reform legislation Congress adopts should not grant amnesty to, or confer legal status upon, illegal aliens in the United States. Please take this opportunity to send a loud and clear message to Speaker Pelosi and other Congressional leaders that it’s time for real change in Washington. Tell your Representatives that instead of continuing the same old policies that cater to special interests and those who break our laws, you want responsible immigration policy that promotes the interests of Americans.Call your Representatives today and tell them:• You want TRUE immigration reform that supports American workers, the enforcement of our laws, and our national security. • By calling for mandatory E-Verify, improved border security and rejecting amnesty, the Chaffetz Resolution promotes TRUE immigration reform. • You want your Representative to sign on as a co-sponsor of the Chaffetz Resolution (H.Res. 1026). The following Representatives have already signed on as co-sponsors of the Chaffetz Resolution. Call them today and thank them for standing up for true immigration reform:(NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT A SINGLE CA DEMOCRAT ON THIS LIST! DESPITE THE STAGGERING UNEMPLOYMENT, MEXICAN GANG CRIMES, PRISON FOR ILLEGALS COST, WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS DEFICITS. WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU? CAN WE AFFORD THE LA RAZA DEMS?)• Jason Chaffetz (R-UT-03) – 202-225-7751 • Duncan Hunter (R-CA-52) – 202-225-5672 • Frank Kratovil (D-MD-01) – 202-225-5311 • Glenn Nye (D-VA-02) – 202-225-4215 • John Fleming (R-LA-04) – 202-225-2777 • Cynthia Lummis (R-WY-At Large) – 202-225-2311 • Mike Coffman (R-CO-06) – 202-225-7882 • Tom McClintock (R-CA-04) – 202-225-2511 • Bill Posey (R-FL-15) – 202-225-3671 • Phil Roe (R-TN-01) – 202-225-6356 • Gregg Harper (R-MS-03) – 202-225-5031 • Lynn Jenkins (R-KS-02) – 202-225-6601 • John Barrow (D-GA-12) – 202-225-2823 • Bobby Bright (D-AL-02) – 202-225-2901 • Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO-09) – 202-225-2956 • Pete Olson (R-TX-22) – 202-225-5951 • Gene Taylor (D-MS-04) – 202-225-5772 • Patrick Murphy (D-PA-08) – 202-225-4276 • Mike McIntrye (D-NC-07) – 202-225-2731 • Steve Kagen (D-WI-08) – 202-225-5665 • Heath Shuler (D-NC-11) – 202-225-6401 • Travis Childers (D-MS-01) – 202-225-4306 Call your Representatives TODAY! To find your Representative's phone numbers, click here.You can also fax your Member of Congress and tell them you support the Chaffetz Resolution.When you’re done, please reach out to your family and friends and ask them to call/fax too. Stay tuned to FAIR for more information on the Chaffetz legislation*

According to DHS’s own reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or otherwise) are secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the department.

By Ira MehlmanPublished on 12/07/2009

Townhall.com

The setting was not quite the flight deck of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln with a “Mission Accomplished” banner as the backdrop, but it was the next best thing. Speaking at the Center for American Progress (CAP) on Nov. 13, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared victory over illegal immigration and announced that the Obama administration is ready to move forward with a mass amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens already living in the United States.Arguing the Obama administration’s case for amnesty, Napolitano laid out what she described as the “three-legged stool” for immigration reform. As the administration views it, immigration reform must include “a commitment to serious and effective enforcement, improved legal flows for families and workers, and a firm but fair way to deal with those who are already here.” Acknowledging that a lack of confidence in the government’s ability and commitment to effectively enforce the immigration laws it passes proved to be the Waterloo of previous efforts to gain amnesty for illegal aliens, Napolitano was quick to reassure the American public that those concerns could be put to rest.“For starters, the security of the Southwest border has been transformed from where it was in 2007,” stated the secretary. Not only is the border locked up tight, she continued, but the situation is well in-hand in the interior of the country as well. “We’ve also shown that the government is serious and strategic in its approach to enforcement by making changes in how we enforce the law in the interior of the country and at worksites…Furthermore, we’ve transformed worksite enforcement to truly address the demand side of illegal immigration.”If Rep. Joe Wilson had been in attendance to hear Secretary Napolitano’s CAP speech he might well have had a few choice comments to offer. But since he wasn’t, we will have to rely on the Department of Homeland Security’s own data to assess the veracity of Napolitano’s claims.According to DHS’s own reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or otherwise) are secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the department. DHS claims to have “effective control” over just 894 miles of border. That’s 894 out of 8,607 miles they are charged with protecting. As for the other 7,713 miles? DHS’s stated border security goal for FY 2010 is the same 894 miles.The administration’s strategic approach to interior and worksite enforcement is just as chimerical as its strategy at the border, unless one considers shuffling paper to be a strategy. DHS data, released November 18, show that administrative arrests of immigration law violators fell by 68 percent between 2008 and 2009. The department also carried out 60 percent fewer arrests for criminal violations of immigration laws, 58 percent fewer criminal indictments, and won 63 percent fewer convictions.While the official unemployment rate has climbed from 7.6 percent when President Obama took office in January to 10 percent today, the administration’s worksite enforcement strategy has amounted to a bureaucratic game of musical chairs. The administration has all but ended worksite enforcement actions and replaced them with paperwork audits. When the audits determine that illegal aliens are on the payroll, employers are given the opportunity to fire them with little or no adverse consequence to the company, while no action is taken to remove the illegal workers from the country. The illegal workers simply acquire a new set of fraudulent documents and move on to the next employer seeking workers willing to accept substandard wages.In Janet Napolitano’s alternative reality a mere 10 percent of our borders under “effective control” and sharp declines in arrests and prosecutions of immigration lawbreakers may be construed as confidence builders, but it is hard to imagine that the American public is going to see it that way. If anything, the administration’s record has left the public less confident that promises of future immigration enforcement would be worth the government paper they’re printed on.As Americans scrutinize the administration’s plans to overhaul immigration policy, they are likely to find little in the “three-legged stool” being offered that they like or trust. The first leg – enforcement – the administration has all but sawed off. The second – increased admissions of extended family members and workers – makes little sense with some 25 million Americans either unemployed or relegated to part-time work. And the third – amnesty for millions of illegal aliens – is anathema to their sense of justice and fair play.As Americans well know, declaring “Mission Accomplished” and actually accomplishing a mission are two completely different things. When it comes to enforcing immigration laws, the only message the public is receiving from this administration is “Mission Aborted.”